CAVC Case 90-540: Depression
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · February 7, 1992 · NEBEKER, Chief Judge
This is a decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims — the federal court that reviews Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions, one level above the Board. Court decisions can vacate, reverse, or affirm what the Board did.
Official 2026 VA monthly compensation, including the 2.8% COLA increase.
Dependent add-ons start at a 30% rating. Child-only and dependent-parent rates: see the full 2026 pay chart.
2026 base rates, all ratings (veteran alone)
| Rating | Monthly (2026, incl. 2.8% COLA) |
|---|---|
| 10% | $180.42 |
| 20% | $356.66 |
| 30% | $552.47 |
| 40% | $795.84 |
| 50% | $1,132.90 |
| 60% | $1,435.02 |
| 70% | $1,808.45 |
| 80% | $2,102.15 |
| 90% | $2,362.30 |
| 100% | $3,938.58 |
Conditions Claimed
DepressionPsychiatricBackTDIUEye
Referral disclosure: VetAid earns a referral fee if you become a paying REE Medical client through this link — it helps keep this site free. REE Medical provides paid medical evidence; it is not a law firm, VSO, or claims agent, and VetAid has not independently verified its services. VSOs and VA-accredited representatives will help you file your claim at no cost, and no one can guarantee a rating increase.
Issues on Appeal
DepressionPsychiatricBackTDIUEye
Why It Was Decided This Way
We find that the Veterans' Administration (now the Department of Veterans Affairs) (VA) breached its statutory duty to assist the veteran because it failed to try to obtain psychiatric examination reports and Social Security records that the record on appeal clearly indicated were pertinent to the veteran's pension claim.
Furthermore, the Board failed to provide an adequate statement of reasons or bases for its implicit rejection of the veteran's evidence on that claim.
Accordingly, we retain jurisdiction and remand the record to the Board with instructions that VA fulfill its duty to assist by obtaining the relevant records on that claim, and that the BVA promptly readjudicate the pension claim and provide an adequate statement of reasons or bases regarding its evaluation of the veteran's evidence on that claim.
The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection of his psychiatric disorder because "the evidence received since the prior Board determination is insufficient to establish the presence of an acquired psychiatric disability attributable to military service.
§ 5108 (formerly § 3008), which states: If new and material evidence is presented or secured with respect to a claim which has been disallowed, the Secretary shall reopen the claim and review the former disposition of the claim.
First, the Board must determine whether the evidence submitted since the previous BVA decision is "new and material".
Second, if the evidence is found to be new and material, the claim is to be reopened and the Board must then "assess the new and material evidence in the context of the other evidence of record and make new factual determinations.
Instead, in deciding the service-connection issue, the Board determined that the new evidence did not "demonstrate that the veteran acquired a psychiatric disorder which originated or became worse in service.
Authorities Cited
Regulations Cited (38 CFR / 38 USC)
Denial Type
Credibility|Not New Material|Duty To Assist
Find Similar Precedent for Your Claim
VetAid's analyzer maps your claim against thousands of real Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions like this one — surfacing the exact case law that supports your arguments.
Run my claim through VetAid →